I think that all else being equal, a one-piece tube is to be preferred of course, but there are very good scopes with two and three-piece tube assemblies and very poor ones with one-piece tubes. That should not be a determining factor in scope selection, since most scopes consist of dozens of parts anyway. Shoot me down if I'm wrong here, boys!

BTW, I have heard some pretty good things about Swift riflescopes, but have never used one myself.

swift makes a pretty good scope for the price and there warranty is awesome, you dont send in a broken scope you take it back to where ever you bought it and they hand you a brand new one over the counter and send you on your merry way, swift has been making optics since the 1920's, and they make everything from bino's to microscopes and there stuff isnt to bad the premiers i looked through i found to be pretty comparable to nikon buckmaster or a burris ffii, and if you think about an optics company doesnt stay in business for that many years by making a crappy product, so if thats all the money you wanna spend then go for it

I'd probably try to talk you out of such a high magnification though. Low priced scopes and high magnification are bad mojo, friend.

You'll have WICKED mirage issues with that scope. I would venture to guess you'll never be able to use much of that scope's magnification after 20x or so when it's hot out. Even the barrel's heat going to produce some mirage

A good rule of thumb:

With few exceptions, a lower priced scope ($200), will perform "much better" in the lower magnification ranges, if it'll perform at all.

The more you crank up that power ring, the less optical performance (usage) you'll have...(Shrug.)

thanks everyone for the info,it's very helpful. yes cheaptrick thats the one i'm looking at. i must admit that nikon really looks good to! i also was looking at the v series weavers, maybe i will save up more money and buy a nikon or weaver thanks again to everyone for the info

my bro in law has a bsa that goes up to like 16x or something and it is so cloudy to look through, all the 3x9 swift scope i have looked through were great i was thinking of putting a 4-16 or something in a swift on my 22-250 and i might still but more than likely i would go with a 3x9

For some reason, that relationship between otherwise decent economical scopes and poor perfomance at the higher magnifications doesn't seem to be discussed very often. It is very true and very well worth remembering.

For some reason, that relationship between otherwise decent economical scopes and poor performance at the higher magnifications doesn't seem to be discussed very often. It is very true and very well worth remembering.

I don't know how else to say it without the risk of appearing rude, Ron.

Koshkin and me have harped on the "less is more" stuff for YEARS....

High mag scopes create more problems than they solve in the low, to even some of the medium priced units.

The upper echelon optics can "cut the mirage" better, but mirage is still a point of contention for them all.

i have shot some leupold fixed powered scopes and for some reason they werent bad with miraging, and they were older m-8's one was a 12x the other was a 24x both has parallux adjustment on them and sunshades.

A buddy of mine has swift scopes on a couple of his hunting rifles. He is the average Arkansas deer hunter, a 30-30 and a 30-06. I load for him and check his rifles for zero before hunting season every year. He might shoot a dozen rounds a year. He is a hunter not a shooter. These scopes serve him very well. I wouldn't trust the repeatability of the turrets but the glass isn't bad. The average hunter would be served very well by one. The fact that you can take it to the store and trade it for a new one is awesome if you ask me, that or they don't even trust their own product.....As far as "cheap" scopes are concerned, I have a 6-18X50 Bushnell Banner that I just happen to like and TRUST very much. I won't use the turrets, but have beat the hell out of this scope over the years and it has never lost zero. This scope is about $125 and even comes with Mil-Dot ret. This thing is kinda like a cheap crack whore, not as pretty but you can get 10 times your money's worth. Not that I would know from experience of course(the crack whore I mean)!!

Ok, I am sure this is going to get me shot but.... I have had good luck with the run of the mill Bushnell scopes such as the Banner scope that GhostRider Mentioned. If you need a moderate priced scope I would give them real consideration.

I know this one is 50% more pricey but... seems a good choice if you were willing to step up a bit in price.

For some reason, that relationship between otherwise decent economical scopes and poor performance at the higher magnifications doesn't seem to be discussed very often. It is very true and very well worth remembering.

I don't know how else to say it without the risk of appearing rude, Ron.

Koshkin and me have harped on the "less is more" stuff for YEARS....

High mag scopes create more problems than they solve in the low, to even some of the medium priced units.

The upper echelon optics can "cut the mirage" better, but mirage is still a point of contention for them all.

When I said it doesn't get discussed often, I didn't necessarily mean HERE....

Besides, some of us haven't BEEN here" for years". Sure didn't mean to ruffle you, Old Boy....

that bushnell looks good but i want a little bit more power. i will be using it for small varmits at long ranges and paper punching.i also was looking at the weaver v24. i own two v16's and they have great optics. i did not mean to cause any riffs between members. i forgot to mention that i got $350.00 +/- i know i'm not going to get the best optics for the money i got to spend but i would like to get good optics

that bushnell looks good but i want a little bit more power. i will be using it for small varmits at long ranges and paper punching.i also was looking at the weaver v24. i own two v16's and they have great optics. i did not mean to cause any riffs between members. i forgot to mention that i got $350.00 i know i'm not going to get the best optics for the money i got to spend but i would like to get good optics

Oh, don't worry none about us! cheaptrick's just a little testy lately since he had to go back to work!

Swifts have pretty good glass, my complaint is the eye relief is pretty short although on a varminet rifle that should not be a problem. Someone mentioned Mueller? I have a Mueller 4-16 its decent I would rate it about any Simmons or Tasco about equal and perhaps a bit better then a Leupold Rifleman close to a Bushnell 3200 Elite as far as glass goes.

Personally, I would go with a Swift Premire over the Mueller and I'd take a Weaver V24 over both.

well i went to my local hunting store and looked through some more scopes that they just got in and he had a nikon buckmaster 6x18x40 with fine cross hairs with a dot, and the optics was very clear even set on 18 power. i took it outside and was amazed how clear and detailed everything was. the price was a little more than the mueller and less than the weaver v24. it's nice to be able to look through a scope before you buy it thats one reason i hesitated buying the mueller or swift even though i found a swift dealer he didn't have what i wanted in stock.i believe i will go for the nikon,it should be nice on my cheap handi rifle. thanks again for everyones info,it's nice to know that there is a forum out here that helps people out on things like this!

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum